Category Archives: ethics

A Joke?

Posted on by
Reply

President Joe Biden (D) was asked a question while he was playing around with an electric Ford F-150 truck, taking it for joy test drives around the parking lot of a Ford plant in Michigan.

Here’s the exchange.

Reporter: Mr President, can I ask you a quick question on Israel before you drive away since it’s so important?
Biden: No, you can’t. Not unless you get in front of the car as I step on it. I’m only teasing[.]

Only teasing?

This is part and parcel with his then-boss President Barack Obama’s (D) overt attack on journalists, arresting one, spying on another’s personal communications, spying on that one’s mother’s personal communications, attempting to blackball an entire news organization—all because they asked inconvenient questions.

This was no joke—Joe Biden was threatening a journalist because the man asked an inconvenient question.

Abraham Accords

Posted on by
Reply

Allegedly—only allegedly—some peace deals might have been brokered by the Trump-Pence administration, with administration senior advisor Jared Kushner’s critical help.

But President Biden-Harris aren’t convinced. Ze said through White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki that

we don’t think they [the Trump administration] did anything constructive really to bring an end to the longstanding conflict in the Middle East[.]

Apparently, the Abraham Accords, bilateral peace deals between Israel and each of four used-to-be Arab enemies, are only figments of the fetid imaginations of President Joe Biden (D) and Co-President Kamala Harris (D). This is the disconnect from reality in the White House that our nation is saddled with.

“Polling Error”

Posted on by
Reply

An “expert panel” claims it has figured out the polling errors the industry has made over the last several election cycles—all the way back to the Eisenhower election cycles, in fact.

Pollsters oversampled one party or the other.

NSS.

The “experts” missed the real problem, though, or they chose not to mention it (which elision, if that’s what they’re doing, would be consistent with polling behavior).

Regardless of the cause of their oversampling (and this panel suggested a number of them), the pollsters—in every poll—knew they were oversampling one party or the other by the time they’d closed each poll and begun going over their data. The pollsters then made the decision to make no effort to correct for that oversampling, or to say in their published results that they were oversampling and had no reliable method of correcting for that.

They chose, instead, to masquerade their results as valid without caveat of any sort.

That’s the dishonesty of the pollsters.

And this: the number of polls examined may be too small to indicate whether the apparent bias toward Democrats/Progressive-Democrats is valid, but the appearance should be investigated in its own right.

Bipartisanship Progressive-Democrat Style

Posted on by
Reply

President Joe Biden (D) and his Co-President Kamala Harris (D)—it is, at Biden’s behest, the Biden/Harris administration—held an infrastructure meeting last Wednesday with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D, NY), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R, KY), and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R, CA) in which he pushed for acceptance of his $2.3 trillion version of an infrastructure bill along with his commensurately large tax increase plan with which he claims he’ll pay for his infrastructure plan.

Shortly after the meeting, Biden gave an interview to MSNBC, in which he said,

I want to know what we agree on and let’s see if we can get an agreement to kick start this, and then fight over what’s left, and see if I can get it done without Republicans if need be[.]

Since he’s going to pass his stuff along strictly party lines, anyway, what was the point of the meeting?

Plainly, Biden Bipartisanship—Progressive-Democratic Party Bipartisanship—means Republicans go along quietly or be kicked to the curb.

It’s Party’s version of republican democracy: Progressive-Democracy.

Self-Serving

Posted on by
2

The World Health Organization’s Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus set up an inquiry board to look into efforts to deal with the Wuhan Virus situation as the virus was beginning go out from the People’s Republic of China.

The Tedros’ WHO board has made a couple of very unsurprising findings.

The World Health Organization should be given the power to swiftly investigate threatening pathogens in any country….

National sovereignty be damned. A supranational entity should be able to go where it pleases. Especially WHO.

The second finding centers on these:

The panel’s report, however, doesn’t directly criticize [the People’s Republic of China] and instead praises it….

Never mind that the world first learned of the virus from the Republic of China (which the People’s Republic of China continues to block from participating in any WHO proceedings). The board’s report also spikes

mention [of PRC] authorities’ efforts to prevent medical staff and health officials from sharing information on the emerging disease.

This against the backdrop of PRC…influence…over the WHO and over Tedros in particular.

Nothing self-serving here. Not a bit.